Tower and Town, November 2022

  (view the full edition)

Letters To Papers: On Fracking

As part of the Year 11 Creative writing GCSE course, students at St. John’s were asked to find a newspaper article which interested them and formulate a concise response using the principles of rhetoric. They were then asked to submit their letter to the paper in which the article originated. Some very strong, emotive and genuine letters were submitted, showing an engagement and thoughtfulness about current affairs that affect them and their peers. Across the next few pages is a sample of these letters. Another of our students, Mia Pitts, actually had hers published in the Guardian on 30th September, should you like to read it there.

The fracking issue shown in Peter Walker and Helena Horton’s eye-opening article (‘Tory MPs angrily challenge Rees-Mogg’s fracking revival plan’, 22nd September) truly highlights how little say the public has in important national decisions.  

 By enabling laws of the extraction of shale gas, we will be releasing a storm of unnecessary and unknown possibilities, all because of Rees-Mogg’s predictable, hasty jump at an easier option. The fact that such a substantial decision on a matter like this could be so freely made with little input by local towns (that will be directly affected) really makes one think, is my voice actually heard? 

 As a student, having your opinions ignored is not unfamiliar territory. Obviously, we are too young, naive, and foolish to even begin to fathom the problems of today, but I ask you to consider this… Who will be the ones forced to pick up the pieces of the broken puzzle tomorrow? The ones to draw up emergency plans in the future to attempt to fix the irreversible obstacles, left by those who didn’t want to act?  

 Here are three main reasons why Rees-Mogg’s “fracking revival plan” should not be allowed. Firstly, it can cause unpredictable seismic activity. If scientists get their maths wrong, even by a little, earthquakes could become the new normal. We might start to practice additional, avoidable drills in our schools. 

Secondly, the chemicals used in the complex process can harm human-health, can lead to cancer. Human life, all at a cost of a quick economic cash-grab.  

 And lastly, fracking has tremendous greenhouse effects due to its by-product of methane. And so, I’d like to leave you with this thought: do you really want to undo decades of work of environmentalists, to bargain all the detrimental consequences of fracking for a speedy, abrupt, access to non-renewable energy? 

Tara Algoz